DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
RESPONSE TO AMENDMENT
Claims 68-87 are pending in the application. Claims 1-67 have been cancelled. Claims 68-87 have been added.
Answers to Applicants' Arguments
Applicants' arguments in the response filed 29 July 2026, regarding the 35 U.S.C. §103 rejections made of record, have been fully considered and are deemed persuasive. The rejections have been withdrawn in view of the applicants' cancellation of the claims.
New and Repeated Rejections
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office Action.
Claim Objections
Claims 82 and 84 are objected to because of the following informalities:
With Regards to Claim 82: Instant claim 82 recites --the other component-- in line 18, which appears to be a typographical error; it is recommended to correct this to read as "the another
With Regards to Claim 84: Instant claim 82 recites --the other component-- in line 15, which appears to be a typographical error; it is recommended to correct this to read as "the another.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claims 82-87 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
With Regards to Claims 82-83: Instant claim 82 recites the limitation --the other component-- in line 18. As written, the claim is indefinite because it can have two conflicting interpretations: (1) that said "other component" is any of the other "plurality of components"; or (2) that said "other component" is said "another component". For the purposes of examination, the latter interpretation has been applied and the limitation is read as "the another
Claim 83, which depends from claim 82, is rejected for the same reasons as recited above.
With Regards to Claims 84-87: Instant claim 84 recites the limitation --the other component-- in line 15. As written, the claim is indefinite because it can have two conflicting interpretations: (1) that said "other component" is any of the other "plurality of components"; or (2) that said "other component" is said "another component". For the purposes of examination, the latter interpretation has been applied and the limitation is read as "the another
Claims 85-87, which depend from claim 82, are rejected for the same reasons as recited above.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claims 68-70, 75-79, and 82-87 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Albertson et al. (US 6,095,739 A) in view of Eibon et al. (US 2014/0255608 A1) and Van Eck (US 4,129,059 A), as evidenced by Non-Patent Literature No. 1 ("Pure Red") (referred to herein as "NPL-1") and Non-Patent Literature No. 2 ("Yellow") (referred to herein as "NPL-2"), Non-Patent Literature No. 3 ("CIE2000 Calculator") (referred to herein as "NPL-3"), and Non-Patent Literature No. 4 ("ST Strap Tie") (referred to herein as "Simpson").
Regarding Claim 68: Albertson discloses categorizing fasters and construction connectors by size and type using a color coding system, wherein a different color is pre-selected to define a fastener property, and the colors can be fluorescent colors, visible light spectrum colors, neon colors, and marking materials that fade over time (figure 1B, [Col. 2: li. 37 to Col. 3: li. 40], and [Col. 6: li. 31 to Col. 7: li. 35] of Albertson). Albertson also discloses a construction comprising construction connectors (e.g., "ST6236" metal straps), wood beam/members, and color coded fasteners applied to color coded corresponding construction connectors, wherein the construction connectors are secured by the fasteners (figure 5B, 5D, and [Col. 9: li. 40 to Col. 10: li. 29] of Albertson). It is also disclosed by Albertson that the construction connectors (e.g., metal straps) comprise holes (openings) into which the color coded fasteners (e.g., nails) are inserted, the color coded fastener securing the construction connectors with the wood beam/members (figures 5B to 5D and [Col. 9: li. 40 to Col. 10: li. 29] of Albertson). Albertson discloses that the coating can extend up to about 0.75 inches along the shaft from the underside of the head of the fastener, and that the (figures 1B to 1C of Albertson). (NOTE: Albertson discloses that the coating can extend up to 0.75 inches along the shaft from the head of the fastener (e.g., nail) (see figures 1B to 1C of Albertson), and that the metallic component can be a "ST6236" metal strap, but does not explicitly recite that --the coating covers the exterior surface and extends between the exterior surface and an interior surface of the metallic component defining the fastener-receiving opening such that the exterior surface is separated from and is not in direct contact with the interior surface--. However, it has been evidenced by Simpson that the "ST6236" metal strap is of G90 galvanized zinc with a thickness of 68 mil (0.068 inches) (see "Product Information Table" of Simpson). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art that the length of the coating on the shaft (i.e., 0.75 inches) would exceed the thickness (e.g., 0.068 inches) of metallic component (i.e., the ST6236 metal strap), which meets the limitation of the claim.) Specifically, Albertson explicitly show that for --an assembled structure comprising: a plurality of components comprising a metallic component defining a fastener-receiving opening; and a coated fastener securing the metallic component to another component of the plurality of components, the coated fastener comprising: a fastener body; and a coating applied to the metallic fastener body, wherein a portion of the metallic fastener body is received in the fastener-receiving opening and has an exterior surface, and wherein the coating covers the exterior surface and extends between the exterior surface and an interior surface of the metallic component defining the fastener-receiving opening such that the exterior surface is separated from and is not in direct contact with the interior surface--.
Albertson fails to disclose --the coated fastener comprising: a metallic fastener body; and the coating comprising: a binder; and a plurality of aluminum flakes dispersed in the binder, each aluminum flake having a surface layer comprising at least one of a colored material and a luminescent material, wherein the metallic fastener body has a metallic composition different from a metallic composition of the metallic component--.
Eibon discloses a multilayer composite coating on a substrate, the multilayer composite coating comprising an opaque coating layer of a coating composition, the coating composition comprising a resinous binder and a pigment composition, wherein the pigment composition comprises: colored inorganic pigment particles; metal and/or metal alloy flake pigment particles (e.g., aluminum flakes); and interference pigment particles ([0001], [0006], [0057]-[0059], [0092], [0105], [0106], and [0109] of Eibon). Eibon further discloses that the aluminum flakes can have a colorant on the surfaces of the flakes ([0106] and [0109] of Eibon). Eibon also discloses that the substrate can be various metallic substrates, such as ferrous metals and non-ferrous metals ([0012] of Eibon).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to have incorporated the substrate and the coating of Eibon with the fastener and the coating of Albertson, respectively, in order to have --the coated fastener comprising: a metallic fastener body; and the coating comprising: a binder; and a plurality of aluminum flakes dispersed in the binder, each aluminum flake having a surface layer comprising at least one of a colored material, wherein the metallic fastener body has a metallic composition different from a metallic composition of the metallic component--. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to have incorporated the substrate and the coating of Eibon with the fastener and the coating of Albertson, from the stand-point of having a ferrous or non-ferrous metallic substrate having a coating with the appearance of a tri-coat coating system in fewer than three coating layers and a hue angle of 118-158 when measured at a 25° viewing angle ([0001] and [0115] of Eibon). (In the instant case, Albertson discloses that the coating can have a color used to distinguish the physical and other characteristics of the fasteners ([Col. 2: li. 58-61] of Albertson), Eibon discloses a tri-coat layer with a colored, translucent coating that exhibits gonio-apparent properties on a ferrous or non-ferrous metal substrate ([0003] and [0012] of Eibon). As such, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to use the colored coating of Eibon as the coating of Albertson to have a distinguishable coating for identifying fasteners (i.e., ferrous metal fasteners from non-ferrous metal fasteners). Furthermore, since it is well-known for fasteners (e.g., nails, screw, and bolts) to be of a metal material, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have used the ferrous metal and non-ferrous metal of Eibon as the material of the fastener disclosed by Albertson, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use. See MPEP §2144.07.)
Regarding Claim 69: Albertson in view of Eibon the coated fastener is a bolt, the metallic fastener body comprises a head and a shaft extending from the head, and the portion received in the fastener-receiving opening comprises at least a portion of the shaft ([Col. 6: li. 25-30] of Albertson).
Regarding Claim 70: Albertson in view of Eibon discloses that the binder comprises at least one selected from the group consisting of an epoxy-based binder, an acrylic binder, a polyurethane binder, or a polyester binder ([0058]-[0061], [0063], [0064], and [0091] of Eibon).
Regarding Claim 75: Albertson in view of Eibon discloses that the surface layer comprises the colored material ([0106] and [0109] of Eibon).
Regarding Claim 76: Albertson in view of Eibon discloses that the colored material imparts to the coating a color represented by a set of CIE Lab coordinates (L, a, b) (figures 1B and 5B to 5D, [Col. 2: li. 37 to Col. 3: li. 40], [Col. 6: li. 31 to Col. 7: li. 35], and [Col. 9: li. 40 to Col. 10: li. 29] of Albertson; [0106] and [0109] of Eibon). (Note: Albertson discloses that the colored coating can be selected from several kinds of colors (e.g., red, yellow, orange, etc.) (figure 1B of Albertson). Since CIE Lab coordinates are a color mapping system used to identify various colors, each color would have --a set of CIE Lab coordinates (L, a, b)-- as claimed.)
Regarding Claim 77: Albertson in view of Eibon discloses the assembled structure further comprises a plurality of groups of coated fasteners securing the plurality of components together within the assembled structure, the coated fastener being a member of one group of the plurality of groups of coated fasteners; each group of coated fasteners comprises a plurality of identical coated fasteners; each group of coated fasteners has a structural characteristic that differs between the plurality of groups of coated fasteners; and the coating of each group of coated fasteners has a distinct color represented by a set of CIE Lab coordinates (L, a, b) (figures 1B and 5B to 5D, [Col. 2: li. 37 to Col. 3: li. 40], [Col. 6: li. 31 to Col. 7: li. 35], and [Col. 9: li. 40 to Col. 10: li. 29] of Albertson) (Note: Albertson discloses that the colored coating can be selected from several kinds of colors (e.g., red, yellow, orange, etc.) (figure 1B of Albertson). Since CIE Lab coordinates are a color mapping system used to identify various colors, each color would have --a set of CIE Lab coordinates (L, a, b)-- as claimed.)
Regarding Clim 78: Albertson in view of Eibon discloses the claimed assembled structure, but do not explicitly recite --a color difference ΔE between any two groups of coated fasteners, calculated using a CIEDE2000 color difference formula, is greater 3.0--.
Albertson in view of Eibon do no explicitly disclosed a color difference value that is greater than the predetermined threshold value. However, given that the distinct color of each group of fasteners can be at least yellow or red as disclosed by Albertson (figure 1B), it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have chosen "red" (pure red, which has been evidenced by NPL-1 to have CIE LAB color space values of (53.2, 80.1, 67.2) (see [Pg. 4] of NPL-1) as the distinct color of one group of fasteners and "yellow" (which has been evidenced by NPL-2 to have CIE LAB color space values of (97.14, -21.56, 94.48) (see [Pg. 6] of NPL-2). In the instant case, when the two distinct colors are pure red and yellow, it has been evidenced by NPL-3 (which provided a color difference calculator that used the CIEDE2000 color difference formula) that they would have a calculated color difference of 64.32 (see [Pg. 1] of NPL-3); which anticipates the claimed ranges of --ΔE is greater than 3.0--. See MPEP §2131.03(I).
A person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made would have chosen one group of fasteners to be red and another group of fasteners to be yellow, since such a change to the color of any group of fasteners would have amounted to a mere aesthetic design choice, and is supported by the teachings of Albertson ([Col. 2: li. 37 to Col. 3: li. 40] of Albertson).
Regarding Claim 79: Albertson in view of Eibon discloses the claimed assembled structure, but does not explicitly recite --the distinct colors of each group of fasteners have a chroma value (C) greater than 40 in a CIE LCH color space, wherein the chroma value (C) is calculated using formula C =sqrt(a2 + b2), where a and b are the CIE Lab coordinates of the color--.
However, given that the distinct color of each group of fasteners can be at least yellow or red as disclosed by Albertson (figure 1B), it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have chosen "red" (pure red, which has been evidenced by NPL-1 to have CIE LAB color space values of (53.2, 80.1, 67.2) (see [Pg. 4] of NPL-1])) as the distinct color of one group of fasteners and "yellow" (which has been evidenced by NPL-2 to have CIE LAB color space values of (97.14, -21.56, 94.48) (see [Pg. 6] of NPL-2])). In the instant case, when the two distinct colors are pure red and yellow, they would have a chroma value calculated to be about 104.5 [=sqrt((80.1)2+(67.2)2)] and about 96.90 [=sqrt((-21.56)2+(94.48)2)], respectively; which both anticipate the claimed ranges of --C greater than 40--. See MPEP §2131.03(I).
A person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made would have chosen one group of fasteners to be red and another group of fasteners to be yellow, since such a change to the color of any group of fasteners would have amounted to a mere aesthetic design choice, and is supported by the teachings of Albertson ([Col. 2: li. 37 to Col. 3: li. 40] of Albertson).
Regarding Claim 82: Albertson in view of Eibon discloses a method for assembling a structure, the method comprising: providing a plurality of components comprising a metallic component defining a fastener-receiving opening and another component; selecting a coated fastener comprising: a metallic fastener body; and a coating applied to the metallic fastener body, the coating comprising: a binder; and a plurality of aluminum flakes dispersed in the binder, each aluminum flake having a surface layer comprising at least one of a colored material and a luminescent material, wherein the metallic fastener body has a metallic composition different from a metallic composition of the metallic component; receiving a portion of the metallic fastener body in the fastener-receiving opening, the portion having an exterior surface covered by the coating, with the coating extending between the exterior surface and an interior surface of the metallic component defining the fastener-receiving opening such that the exterior surface is separated from and is not in direct contact with the interior surface; and securing the metallic component to the another component with the coated fastener (at least figures 1B to 1C, 5B to 5D, [Col. 2: li. 37 to Col. 3: li. 40], [Col. 6: li. 31 to Col. 7: li. 35], and [Col. 9: li. 40 to 11: li. 7] of Albertson; at least [0001], [0006], [0013], [0057]-[0059], [0092], [0105], [0106], [0109], and [0133] of Eibon).
Regarding Claim 83: Albertson in view of Eibon discloses that the surface layer comprises the colored material, the colored material imparts a color to the coating, the color corresponds to a structural characteristic of the metallic fastener body, and selecting the coated fastener comprises selecting the coated fastener based on the color (at least figures 1B to 1C, 5B to 5D, [Col. 2: li. 37 to Col. 3: li. 40], [Col. 6: li. 31 to Col. 7: li. 35], and [Col. 9: li. 40 to 11: li. 7] of Albertson; at least [0001], [0006], [0013], [0057]-[0059], [0092], [0105], [0106], [0109], and [0133] of Eibon).
Regarding Claim 84: Albertson in view of Eibon discloses a method for manufacturing an assembled structure, the method comprising: dispersing a plurality of aluminum flakes in a binder to form a coating, each aluminum flake having a surface layer comprising at least one of a colored material and a luminescent material; applying the coating to a metallic fastener body such that the coating covers an exterior surface of a portion of the metallic fastener body; curing the coating on the metallic fastener body to form a coated fastener; providing a plurality of components comprising a metallic component defining a fastener-receiving opening and another component, wherein the metallic fastener body has a metallic composition different from a metallic composition of the metallic component; receiving the portion of the metallic fastener body in the fastener-receiving opening with the coating extending between the exterior surface and an interior surface of the metallic component defining the fastener-receiving opening such that the exterior surface is separated from and is not in direct contact with the interior surface; and securing the metallic component to the another component with the coated fastener (at least figures 1B to 1C, 5B to 5D, [Col. 2: li. 37 to Col. 3: li. 40], [Col. 6: li. 31 to Col. 7: li. 35], and [Col. 9: li. 40 to 11: li. 7] of Albertson; at least [0001], [0006], [0013], [0057]-[0059], [0092], [0105], [0106], [0109], and [0133] of Eibon).
Regarding Claim 85: Albertson in view of Eibon discloses that before dispersing the plurality of aluminum flakes in the binder, applying at least one of the colored material and the luminescent material to each aluminum flake to form the surface layer (at least [0092], [0105], [0106], [0109], and [0133] of Eibon).
Regarding Claim 86: Albertson in view of Eibon discloses that applying the coating to the metallic fastener body comprises at least one of spraying and dipping (at least [Col. 10: li. 35-37] of Albertson).
Regarding Claim 87: Albertson in view of Eibon discloses that curing the coating comprises subjecting the coating to at least one of thermal treatment and infrared radiation (at least [0124]-[0125] and [0133] of Eibon).
Claims 71, 72, and 74 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Albertson et al. (US 6,095,739 A) in view of Eibon et al. (US 2014/0255608 A1) as applied to claim 68 above, and further in view of Hayes et al. (US 2010/0233471 A1).
Albertson in view of Eibon is relied upon as described above.
Regarding Claims 71 and 74: Albertson in view of Eibon fails to disclose that --the binder comprises a dielectric or non-conductive material, and wherein the coating obstructs a flow of electrical current directly between the exterior surface and the interior surface-- {instant claim 71}, --the metallic component comprises aluminum and the metallic fastener body comprises at least one of steel, titanium, and a nickel alloy-- {instant claim 72}, and/or --the binder further comprises a corrosion inhibitor-- {instant claim 74}.
Hayes discloses a protective coating and fasteners coated by said protective coating so as to protect the dissimilar metals assembled together from structural corrosion or deterioration (e.g., galvanic corrosion), wherein the assembled dissimilar metals can comprise a number of different metals and combination of metals (e.g., a titanium fastener, and aluminum structures or elements) ([0002], [0003], [0015], and [0016] of Hayes). Hayes further discloses that the corrosion resistant coating composition consists essentially of approximately 4 to 8% by weight of a salt inorganic constituents formed from cations selected from the group consisting of zinc and calcium, and anions selected from the group consisting of silicates, phosphates, carbonates, and oxides, and approximately 2 to 15% by weight of alkaline polyamine fatty acid salt (PFAS) as a corrosion inhibitor, suspended in a remainder which includes a resin and a pigment such as aluminum ([0014] of Hayes). (Note: It is well-known in the art that pigments of aluminum constitute aluminum flakes with pigment coatings thereon.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to have combined and/or incorporated the coating composition, the fastener, and the structure components of Hayes with the coating, the fastener, and the components respectively disclosed by Albertson in view of Eibon in order to have --the binder comprises a dielectric or non-conductive material, and wherein the coating obstructs a flow of electrical current directly between the exterior surface and the interior surface-- {instant claim 71}, --the metallic component comprises aluminum and the metallic fastener body comprises at least one of steel and titanium-- {instant claim 72}, and --the binder further comprises a corrosion inhibitor-- {instant claim 74}. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to have combined and/or incorporated the coating composition, the fastener, and the structure components of Hayes with the coating, the fastener, and the components respectively disclosed by Albertson in view of Eibon, from the stand-point of lessening the effect of galvanic corrosion between an assembly comprising dissimilar metals, such as a titanium fastener and an aluminum element ([0002], [0003], and [0014]-[0016] of Hayes).
Claim 73 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Albertson et al. (US 6,095,739 A) in view of Eibon et al. (US 2014/0255608 A1) as applied to claim 68 above, and further in view of Millar (US 4,097,639 A).
Albertson in view of Eibon is relied upon as recited above.
Regarding Claim 73: Albertson in view of Eibon discloses that the metal pigment is in the form of aluminum flakes ([0105] and [0106] of Eibon), but fails to disclose that --the plurality of aluminum flakes are aligned parallel to the exterior surface of the portion of the metallic fastener body received in the fastener-receiving opening to form a physical barrier layer--.
Millar discloses a coating exhibiting a flamboyant finish on a conductive substrate ([Col. 1: li. 6-11] of Millar). Millar also discloses that the coating comprises a first coating of a thermosetting film-forming first polymer, a catalytic amount of a blocked catalyst for the first polymer, flake pigments (e.g., leafing aluminum pigment), and other additives ([Col. 1: li. 67 to Col. 2: li. 9] and [Col. 2: li. 31-35] of Millar). Millar further discloses that the first coating is heated to a temperature at which substantially all the pigment flakes are placed in generally the same orientation, and become substantially oriented parallel to the surface of polymer removed from the substrate (i.e., parallel to the substrate surface) ([Col. 3: li. 11-37] and [Col. 5: li. 28-32] of Millar).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to have combined the polymer and coating of Millar with the coating disclosed by Albertson in view of Eibon in order to have --the plurality of aluminum flakes are aligned parallel to the exterior surface of the portion of the metallic fastener body received in the fastener-receiving opening to form a physical barrier layer--. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to have incorporated the polymer and coating of Millar with the coating disclosed by Albertson in view of Eibon, from the stand-point of having a flamboyant finish ([Col. 1: li. 6-11] of Millar). (In the instant case, Millar discloses that the oriented [light] reflective aluminum flakes are aligned parallel to a surface of the substrate and concentrated below a surface of the coating, ([Col. 1: li. 44-49] of Millar). As such, the concentrated layer of reflective aluminum flakes would constitute a barrier layer with respect to light.)
Claims 80 and 81 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Albertson et al. (US 6,095,739 A) in view of Eibon et al. (US 2014/0255608 A1) as applied to claim 68 above, and further in view of Mayer et al. (US 6,565,770 B1).
Albertson in view of Eibon is relied upon as described above.
Regarding Claim 80: Albertson in view of Eibon fails to disclose that --the surface layer comprises the luminescent material--.
Mayer discloses luminescent optical effect pigment flakes comprising pigment flakes encapsulated with a luminescent material to form an outer luminescent coating layer on the flake, the luminescent materials exhibiting fluorescence and phosphorescence ([Col. 4: li. 60 to Col. 5: li. 41]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to have combined the luminescent optical effect pigment flakes of Mayer with the aluminum flakes disclosed by Albertson in view of Eibon in order to have --the surface layer comprise the luminescent material--. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to have combined the luminescent optical effect pigment flakes of Mayer with the aluminum flakes disclosed by Albertson in view of Eibon, from the stand-point of having a flakes that exhibit fluorescence and phosphorescence ([Col. 5: li. 36-41] of Mayer).
Regarding Claim 81: Albertson in view of Eibon and Mayer discloses that the luminescent material comprises at least one of a fluorescent material and a phosphorescent material ([Col. 5: li. 36-62] and [Col. 10: li. 4-65] of Mayer).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Donald M. Flores, Jr. whose telephone number is (571) 270-1466. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30 to 17:00 M-F; Alternate Fridays off.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Frank Vineis can be reached at (571) 270-1547. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/DONALD M FLORES JR/
Donald M. Flores, Jr.Examiner, Art Unit 1781
Prosecution Insights